Battery Electric Vehicle News / Enjoying the Transportation Revolution

Martyn1981

For those worried about battery life expectancy Lexus are promising a 10yr 1million km's with 70%+ battery capacity remaining. Nice.

Lexus UX300e Comes With 10 Year, 1 Million Kilometer Battery Warranty

Batteries for electric cars make people nervous. What if one fails and you get stuck with a ginormous replacement bill? Never mind that there has been hardly any news about battery failures since Nissan had a problem with the batteries for its LEAF back in 2012, especially in hot, dry climates. Or that Tesla is hard at work on a million mile battery. The thought of shelling out big bucks still holds a lot of people back when it comes to considering an electric vehicle at trade-in time.

Lexus has been late to the EV party, but it is about to introduce the UX300e, a battery electric version of its compact SUV, in Europe. The car will have an air cooled 54.3 kWh battery comprised of 288 individual cells. Within the battery pack, each cell will be warmed by its own individual heater when temperatures dip. Cooling will be enhanced by the car’s air conditioning system.

Range is estimated at 248 miles NEDC, according to Green Car Reports. EPA ratings are typically a third less than that figure but that is irrelevant since Lexus has no plans to sell the UX300e in the US. What is important, though, is that the battery in the Lexus UX300e will be warranted by the company for 10 years or 1 million kilometers (600,000 miles), so any concerns about battery life should be eliminated for most buyers. Better yet, the warranty protects against battery degradation below 70% during the warranty period, “provided that the owner respects the regular health checks foreseen in the maintenance program,” Lexus says.

joefizz

Solarchaser said:

Thanks Mart, saved me a long explanation. 

Essentially where some say conversion efficiency doesn't matter, we need hydrogen,  i fall back to, why would you waste 75% of your energy instead of only wasting 25%.

Batts are expensive,  but i wonder how long the cost would take to balance out against a hydrogen plant, when the batteries are using 50-70% more of the energy.

Horses for courses, sure, but if you have excess intermittent re,  then it makes sense to use it for battery back up imo, rather than "wasting" on hydrogen. 

If the conversion on hydrogen comes up to 70%+ then its a different discussion imo

Simple. Its the thing the majority of people promoting battery cars never talk about, the full lifecycle (including end of life).

Hydrogen ice has a lot lower initial and final footprint than batteries. H can be added to gas supplies etc etc so not just limited to single use vehicles limted to one person. People tend to focus in on percentages and o levels physics calculations without seeing the big picture. EVs dont add to the overall national infrastructure, locally they can help out with battery balancing but thats only going to influence a few houses in a street. They are also dependent on subsidy, will prove increasingly expensive and not available to everyone (probably will never be battery trains, busses, heavy transport etc etc).

The argument of 'only wasting' is a straw one as shown up here recently when people are being paid to use the energy. Long term projections have to estimate takeup of each. Right now theres an expanding trial not far from me using wind full on and the excess is generating H for busses. Now unfortunate that the busses here are now only for key workers but interestingly the H busses are being used and the diesel ones sidelined.
Nobody complains about solar panels only being about 20 odd percent efficient these days and probably never going to go up to 30% efficient. Its not what it is but what it is used for. Its excess, its underutilisation of a valuable national asset and it will depend on how the output (regardless of efficiency) is best used on the whole.

You also have to consider future energy independence. If you generate your own H locally in country then you arent reliant on scarce resources from other parts of the world as much as you are with other forms of energy (oil, material for batteries etc etc).

People again are confusing the issue, the issue going forward is the generation of capacity and the storage of the inevitable excess that RE brings. The relative efficiencies of storage mechanisms and then onward usage isnt an issue if the end result is equal to or in excess of the required capacity. So for example if you need to install 3x capacity of wind to cover every eventuality then most times you will shut down or sell off at a loss to keep things turning. If you can convert that to an energy store that can be used in multiple environments then thats the way forward. Something like H can be used across the board (see the new h home boilers) and incorporated into existing infrastructure during normal maintenance schedules (such as added to gas network in places). Its not just about personal use cars.

EricMears

Hexane said:

I am increasingly finding that this thread is a listing of news items from cleantechnica. I think that's a worthy aim, if that's what people are after. tbh I tuned out of most of the other threads here when they became a listing of news items from similar clearing houses. I am a homeowner with an expensive PV installation and planning a BEV in the future. In the past I saw this forum as a place for discussion, not a place for being bombarded with links and quotes from mostly one source.

The fact that someone has posted a link here doesn't mean you're obliged to follow it !

Rather than criticising people for posting links that you don't like,  why not do a bit of research yourself and post a few links that you think are more acceptable and which others might appreciate too ?

Martyn1981

joefizz said:

They are also dependent on subsidy, will prove increasingly expensive and not available to everyone (probably will never be battery trains, busses, heavy transport etc etc).

Don't all of these already exist, and whilst trains and trucks are only at an initial stage, the BEV'ing of buses is well advanced.

Back to H2. I think it will probably be an essential form of longer term storage, since (as mentioned before) the storage can be vast but relatively compact. But of course, due to efficiencies, it will (already is) be battery storage for short term intra-day needs. This will hopefully take us into the 90%+ of RE leccy on the grid, then longer term storage like H2 will be needed. But, there may be a gap between the two, since the low efficiency of H2 as a form of storage might mean it takes a while to economically improve upon spill (curtailment, wastage), since overcapacity of RE is the cheapest option up to a point.

Slight problem with your example of needing to build out 3x as much RE to meet needs without H2, since the inefficiencies of H2 mean you need about 3x the leccy in to the leccy out. One situation where H2 has (I believe) a great opportunity is when mixed with captured CO2 to produce methane, as it can then be used to help balance the grid via our large capacity (25GW) of existing CCGT (Combined Cycle Gas Turbines).

Loads of potential options, but my guess is that H2 will become important in the future to help get us over the 100% line, but for transport it seems to have lost the fight with less and less support now that BEV's can do the job better.

Solarchaser

joefizz said:

Solarchaser said:

Thanks Mart, saved me a long explanation. 

Essentially where some say conversion efficiency doesn't matter, we need hydrogen,  i fall back to, why would you waste 75% of your energy instead of only wasting 25%.

Batts are expensive,  but i wonder how long the cost would take to balance out against a hydrogen plant, when the batteries are using 50-70% more of the energy.

Horses for courses, sure, but if you have excess intermittent re,  then it makes sense to use it for battery back up imo, rather than "wasting" on hydrogen. 

If the conversion on hydrogen comes up to 70%+ then its a different discussion imo

Simple. Its the thing the majority of people promoting battery cars never talk about, the full lifecycle (including end of life).

Hydrogen ice has a lot lower initial and final footprint than batteries. H can be added to gas supplies etc etc so not just limited to single use vehicles limted to one person. People tend to focus in on percentages and o levels physics calculations without seeing the big picture. EVs dont add to the overall national infrastructure, locally they can help out with battery balancing but thats only going to influence a few houses in a street. They are also dependent on subsidy, will prove increasingly expensive and not available to everyone (probably will never be battery trains, busses, heavy transport etc etc).

The argument of 'only wasting' is a straw one as shown up here recently when people are being paid to use the energy. Long term projections have to estimate takeup of each. Right now theres an expanding trial not far from me using wind full on and the excess is generating H for busses. Now unfortunate that the busses here are now only for key workers but interestingly the H busses are being used and the diesel ones sidelined.
Nobody complains about solar panels only being about 20 odd percent efficient these days and probably never going to go up to 30% efficient. Its not what it is but what it is used for. Its excess, its underutilisation of a valuable national asset and it will depend on how the output (regardless of efficiency) is best used on the whole.

You also have to consider future energy independence. If you generate your own H locally in country then you arent reliant on scarce resources from other parts of the world as much as you are with other forms of energy (oil, material for batteries etc etc).

People again are confusing the issue, the issue going forward is the generation of capacity and the storage of the inevitable excess that RE brings. The relative efficiencies of storage mechanisms and then onward usage isnt an issue if the end result is equal to or in excess of the required capacity. So for example if you need to install 3x capacity of wind to cover every eventuality then most times you will shut down or sell off at a loss to keep things turning. If you can convert that to an energy store that can be used in multiple environments then thats the way forward. Something like H can be used across the board (see the new h home boilers) and incorporated into existing infrastructure during normal maintenance schedules (such as added to gas network in places). Its not just about personal use cars.

There has been a few articles recently. More than likely put up by Mart, about reprocessing end of life batteries...

I certainly never made this purely about EV's, in fact I said battery back up... straw!

Electric is limited to single use, single person vehicles?
You been living in a nuclear blast shelter?

There's already lots of electric busses, recently I visited Brussels and noted their entire airport transfer fleet is electric busses.

Will you have battery trains.... theres already battery trains that are used to cross parts of the lines that are not electrified.
But more globally I'd expect to see batteries used to balance the electric train lines.

And yeah, why would people focus on percentages eh, how inconvenient,  who wants high efficiency anyway.... and my argument is made of straw?? 🤔

Generally when people denigrate others with such terms, it reflects worse on the person saying them, than who they are being said to, when I hear "don't worry about..... look at the big picture", I know I'm being conned.

So yeah batts are bad, they would never be used for grid balancing etc (Aus).

Hmmm
Pretty much everyone complains about solar panel efficiency,  but unless you have a 80% efficient way to harness the sun... im not really sure what your point is there. 
If you do have an 80% way of harnessing the sun, im all ears, and stand ready to clear my rooves.

If you have so much excess energy that your batteries are already full, then sure, use it for hydrogen,  but to use it for something very inefficient before using on very efficient seems very silly indeed, I guess that will be my o level physics tripping me up again🙄

Martyn1981

Solarchaser said:

If you have so much excess energy that your batteries are already full, then sure, use it for hydrogen,  but to use it for something very inefficient before using on very efficient seems very silly indeed, I guess that will be my o level physics tripping me up again🙄

That's the crucial point, why go down an inefficient storage route before it's needed. Leccy generation to a BEV ..... simples, so why introduce extra stages and extra equipment (and more CO2 consumption in manufacturing), between the leccy supply and the electric motor, so much extra cost, material consumption and waste.

But, it's the extra energy needed that is the killer. I was pondering this yesterday, and recall my numbers posted on the now deleted thread which were roughly that a BEV car fleet would consume 17% (gross) more leccy than we currently generate, and around 10% net when energy savings at the refinery are taken into account, so that's plus 10% generation needed. But if HFCV's need 3x more, then that's 51% gross, and 44% net increase in generation just for cars before we get to commercial vehicles. That's a lot of extra cost, and an enormous consumption of energy and materials to produce that extra generation, and of course additional CO2 emissions due to the longer time it will take to roll out said generation, whilst FF's are still being consumed on the grid.

Where needed H2 may be a solution for vehicles, such as Japan and other parts of Asia where they may not be able to generate enough leccy, creating an export industry/opportunity for Australia with shipments of H2 (probably as ammonia), but even then I'd assume nations would prioritize leccy consumption, so BEV's might be preferred still, with H2 targeted towards heating, manufacturing, storage etc. But I'm just guessing now.

Martyn1981

Title is spot on, I got lost/bored but I'm sure others will 'geek out'. 

Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About The Volkswagen MEB Battery Pack And More!

Despite the topsy turvy world created by the coronavirus, Volkswagen is getting close to the time when its first electric vehicles based on the MEB platform will hit the streets. 5 long years after it disgraced itself with its diesel cheating scandal, the company is ready for redemption by being the first global auto manufacturer to jump into the electric car future with both feet. If everything goes as planned (when does that ever happen?), Volkswagen will be building and selling only electric cars in the foreseeable future.

Martyn1981

Martyn1981 said:

The other end of the BEV market, where cheap and simple is crucial:

Mobility For Africa Shows How Electric Vehicles Can Transform Lives Where It Matters Most

A lot of startups pop up from time to time with the “Next Big Thing” or the next big service offering in EVs. Most of the time they will be hyping some futuristic and to some extent, mythical new six-figure price tagged EV packed with all the “Bells and Whistles” that promises to do 0 to 100 km/h in under 2 seconds! Sometimes we wonder why more people aren’t looking into some more practical solutions to everyday problems like an EV for ordinary people and not some futuristic vaporware some startups promise in perpetuity. People just want to be able to get about safely and efficiently!

More on this and the solar charging stations:

Mobility For Africa Shows How Electric Vehicles Can Transform Lives Where it Matters Most – Part 2

Mobility For Africa (MFA) has just completed the first of a two-part pilot phase which we covered here recently. MFA has now started the second phase of the pilot. MFA tested several models which included exploring agricultural produce transport services as well as general taxi services. It also used the pilot to measure the financial viability of the project as well as identifying solutions for different business models.
We caught up with Shantha Bloemen (SB), Founding Director of Mobility For Africa to find out more:

[Apologies if my posts are Cleantechnica heavy, but that's just because it's one of the trusted sites I check in the mornings. Ironically, since lockdown I have to head out early every morning, so scan and skim time is limited, but posts from all, from multiple sites would be welcomed by myself and everyone else I assume. Obviously this is not a thread for me to share news, but for everyone to share 'stuff' that they find and think that others might be interested in too. Please enjoy, please have fun. M.]

joefizz

Solarchaser said:

If you have so much excess energy that your batteries are already full, then sure, use it for hydrogen,  but to use it for something very inefficient before using on very efficient seems very silly indeed, I guess that will be my o level physics tripping me up again🙄

What was the labour party slogan in the last election? For the many, not the few?

Thats the crux of it, its not about efficiencies, its about supplying the poor people who have to drive, get to work, heat homes etc, not just those who can afford EVs and home battery systems. Moving away from oil to gas and then something else/combination with something else.

As for using inefficient before efficient, Ive read for years on here about immersion diverters rather than export to grid... I can not use the electricity I generate at the minute, so the majority gets exported to the grid. Countries can do that but what if every country is exporting to the 'grid'. It will have to be curtailed or used. As you said you can use batteries either in homes or on the network but there is an alternative, and its ok saying what can and was happening before, we are under partial reset conditions and relying on imports of certain things is now very much the focus. Thats the reality of now.

Its not about individuals or individual use cases but about network security (and now probably national security post covid).

ABrass

joefizz said:

Solarchaser said:

If you have so much excess energy that your batteries are already full, then sure, use it for hydrogen,  but to use it for something very inefficient before using on very efficient seems very silly indeed, I guess that will be my o level physics tripping me up again🙄

What was the labour party slogan in the last election? For the many, not the few?

Thats the crux of it, its not about efficiencies, its about supplying the poor people who have to drive, get to work, heat homes etc, not just those who can afford EVs and home battery systems. Moving away from oil to gas and then something else/combination with something else.

As for using inefficient before efficient, Ive read for years on here about immersion diverters rather than export to grid... I can not use the electricity I generate at the minute, so the majority gets exported to the grid. Countries can do that but what if every country is exporting to the 'grid'. It will have to be curtailed or used. As you said you can use batteries either in homes or on the network but there is an alternative, and its ok saying what can and was happening before, we are under partial reset conditions and relying on imports of certain things is now very much the focus. Thats the reality of now.

Its not about individuals or individual use cases but about network security (and now probably national security post covid).

Efficiency is part of the discussion but it isn't the only factor. Green hydrogen is always going to be less efficient than batteries charged from the grid, which means it will always be more expensive than battery power.

That might change if you include effectively free energy supplied when grid demand is lower than the supply you're generating. Then the hydrogen is almost free and you're looking at production equipment, distribution  and storage costs. Right now hydrogen is similar or more expensive than petrol and it's mostly from the cheaper, non green, sources. Green hydrogen would have to plummet in cost to be equal to petrol costs and plummet further to equal grid electricity. That might happen but it's not going to be soon.

In the mean time electric cars are already approaching price parity and are continuing their price drops (or frozen prices and capability upgrades). For passenger cars Hydrogen has missed the bus. It might have missed the bus for buses and HGVs as well.

Green hydrogen is very useful as a storage medium and as a replacement for natural gas. But cars? Nah.